Hi and thanks for visiting the best Ravens forum on the planet. You do not have to be a member to browse the various forums, but in order to post and interact with your purple brethren, you will have to **register**. It only takes a couple of minutes. You can also use your Facebook account to log in....just click on the blue 'FConnect' link at the very top of the page.

Re: HGH use in the NFL

Flawed logic. Athletes are not forced to take vitamins, treatment for certain injuries, eat a healthy diet, etc. yet all of these factors can contribute to a players well being.

It's the availability that would make the playing field level.

HGH is not a vitamin, it's a growth hormone, and it's intent was to be used to promote growth where there are defiencies (body does not produce enough). It was never intended to be used by athletes who want to gain a competetive advantage. The problem with your logic here is that you seem to think that HGH should be used to promote better health. That's misguided.

So it's your position is that the NFL should not only legalize it, but promote it by saying that it is "incredibly beneficial"? Assuming that these athletes are going to follow doctor's instructions with this stuff is being a bit naive. And I can't imagine how any doctor who has ethical proncipals is going to administer this stuff to football players who want to become muscle heads. Again, it was never intended to be used for that reason.

Re: HGH use in the NFL

When taken properly and under the care of a doctor, hGH is incredibly beneficial. I have also acknowledged that, when abused, hGH can have harmful side effects. That's not in dispute.

You could say the same thing about anabolic steroids, which were perfectly legal for many years until being controlled in 1990 after some high profile cases of misuse.

The biggest problem with HGH use in sports is the difficulty in testing for it. It is naturally occurring and everyone can have different levels of different types. Even the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) concedes their test isn't 100%, and they are considered the gold standard in testing. They criticized MLB's HGH testing program, which not surprisingly the NFLPA said they would agree to implementing. I guess the NFL wants the best available HGH test not just a dog and pony show like the MLB runs (enough to appease ignorant media types, so it works for them).

Either way, I doubt whatever "anonymous" player has any idea as to what he is talking about. He is probably some bench warmer who looks at guys more athletically gifted than he is and thinks "man these guys must be juicing." That is where he gets his numbers from. I seriously doubt 10-15 guys in every locker room run around telling everyone about their hgh use. Get real. Also keep in mind just because the NFL tests for anabolic steroids doesn't mean no one is using them either.

Re: HGH use in the NFL

Originally Posted by lowrider

HGH is not a vitamin

I never claimed it was.

Originally Posted by lowrider

it's a growth hormone, and it's intent was to be used to promote growth where there are defiencies (body does not produce enough). It was never intended to be used by athletes who want to gain a competetive advantage. The problem with your logic here is that you seem to think that HGH should be used to promote better health. That's misguided.

So, by that logic, it's also misguided that Cymbalta is used to treat depression (very effectively, I might add) when it's original intent was to help diabetic peripheral neuropathy (nerve pain caused by diabetes) and fibromyalgia (muscle pain and stiffness)? I fail to see why "original intent" of the drug has any bearing on this.

But yes, I am promoting it's use as a means to better heath because that's exactly what it's designed to do. It's precisely why athletes try and use it -- it aids in recovery and the building of muscles and connective tissues but does NOT go beyond your genetic blue print. You keep treating hGH like anabolic steroids and it's simply not the same.

Originally Posted by lowrider

So it's your position is that the NFL should not only legalize it, but promote it by saying that it is "incredibly beneficial"? Assuming that these athletes are going to follow doctor's instructions with this stuff is being a bit naive. And I can't imagine how any doctor who has ethical proncipals is going to administer this stuff to football players who want to become muscle heads. Again, it was never intended to be used for that reason.

I am not taking any position on what the league should or should not do other than they shouldn't lump hGH into the same category as anabolic steroids like you are here.

And again, you're creating a false characterization of hGH. It doesn't nor will it ever turn you into a "muscle head" as you put it.

WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

Re: HGH use in the NFL

You could say the same thing about anabolic steroids, which were perfectly legal for many years until being controlled in 1990 after some high profile cases of misuse.

No, you can't. Even in small doses, anabolic steroids puts a tremendous amount of strain on the human body, particularly the liver, renal glands and the brain. There's no *safe* way to take anabolic steroids. Most of the compounds are synthetic and / or engineered from other substances such as horse testosterone, bull testosterone, etc.

Originally Posted by RavensDomination

The biggest problem with HGH use in sports is the difficulty in testing for it. It is naturally occurring and everyone can have different levels of different types. Even the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) concedes their test isn't 100%, and they are considered the gold standard in testing. They criticized MLB's HGH testing program, which not surprisingly the NFLPA said they would agree to implementing. I guess the NFL wants the best available HGH test not just a dog and pony show like the MLB runs (enough to appease ignorant media types, so it works for them).

Stop treating it like it's steroids and simply don't test for it and the problem of testing for hGH goes away.

WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

Re: HGH use in the NFL

Houston is dead on with his HgH knowledge. My day job is writing for Sherdog covering the sport of MMA so I know a little bit about what goes on in the locker-rooms of pro athletes.

First, if they can afford it, almost every fighter is on HgH for the reasons that Houston said: it is much safer than anabolic steroids, it works, and they don't test for it. Now, I would imagine in the NFL (because they are paid a lot more), pretty much everyone is on it.

As fans, why WOULDN'T we want something like HgH, which is safe when administered under doctor's care, to be legal in the NFL? Don't we all complain when our favorite players get injured? Don't we hate it when we don't get to see player x and y because they are banged up and can't play? Don't we want to see players recover faster?

There's the argument that, "We want a level playing field," well, that's an illogical argument because it assumes that the playing field was ever level. It wasn't. Steroids (along with Hgh, have been used and abused for years. There was never this magical level playing field where drugs were properly tested for. That is because even the most stringent testing sports like cycling, drug testers are still woefully behind the drugmakers.

What's the solution? Bury your head in the sand and act like testing policies are effective? They aren't, and for every guy that is dumb enough to get caught there are hundreds of guys who are never caught.

Legalize it, regulate it, and monitor it. That will help curb abuse and make it a level playing field.

Re: HGH use in the NFL

Thanks for your insight s.r.

I'm a huge MMA fan myself. You'll have to start some MMA threads when it's PPV time. There are some fans here!

WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

Re: HGH use in the NFL

[QUOTE=HoustonRaven;626353I never claimed it was.
[/QUOTE]

I know you didn't, but you put it in the same context and inferred that it is no different.

So, by that logic, it's also misguided that Cymbalta is used to treat depression (very effectively, I might add) when it's original intent was to help diabetic peripheral neuropathy (nerve pain caused by diabetes) and fibromyalgia (muscle pain and stiffness)? I fail to see why "original intent" of the drug has any bearing on this.

OK, so "original intent" was a bad choice of words on my part. I am not disputing that HGH has many good medical benefits, but building musclke mass and bigger bones is not why doctors prescribe it to patients. On the other hand football players use it to do exactly that. If you can't acknowledge that, then we are done here.

But yes, I am promoting it's use as a means to better heath because that's exactly what it's designed to do. It's precisely why athletes try and use it -- it aids in recovery and the building of muscles and connective tissues but does NOT go beyond your genetic blue print. You keep treating hGH like anabolic steroids and it's simply not the same.

I am not treating HGH like it is anabolic steroids. Those are your words. What I am trying to say here is that it is considered a performance enhancing drug. Whether you are willing to admit it, that is one BIG reason players use it. And that is why it is a banned substance in all professional sports.

And again, you're creating a false characterization of hGH. It doesn't nor will it ever turn you into a "muscle head" as you put it.

Really? So now you're saying that it does NOT promote muscle and bone growth?

Look, I think we are far apart on this so I think we should just agree to disagree. Thanks for the debate.